Continuation Part 19: Amanda Knox/Raffaele Sollecito

[bagels]

Hard to beat British justice. There is no mafia influence for a start, although there is a strong masonic network in the police.

I believe the three would have been tried at the Old Bailey, the press, as usual, would be barred from publishing anything subjudice. The three would have got Life with a humane leave to apply for parole after six years to be out in nine. They could appeal, but it's not automatic, and it would have to show unusual grounds. 99% of appeals are rejected at first sift.

On what grounds would Amanda have been arrested on?

 

[Vixen]

Just because you can't see it probably makes it likely.

Can you please tell me how cell phone communications work and how the police knew that Amanda and Raffaele turned off their phones? I especially enjoy your description about pilots getting angry because some people turn of their phones instead of putting them in flight mode.

Well, Mr Tesla, you claim to be a telecommunications expert, so you tell us.

 

[Grinder]

The First court evaluates evidence. The appeals court evaluates evidence if the judge decides the point of appeal requires it. You will note in the current case the first court (merits hearing) trial lasted eight months. The appeal, barely three days. See the difference in emphasis? The latter can all be done sitting in chambers, almost.

The court of the second instance is much more of a trial de nova than a appeals court in the US or UK. Whereas here appeals only review the law in Italy new evidence is allowed and the court reviews all the evidence. The Massei trial lasted months but really only had a couple weeks of court. Hellmann wasn't done in three days. Nencini's kangaroo court may have only lasted a few days.

Btw, Nencini's theory of the crime wasn't the same as Massei and wasn't part of the prosecution's appeal.

 

[Vixen]

What ARE U Talking about??????
If 36(I) was LCN, how did the Rome lab test it??????
The Rome Lab ONLY found Amanda DNA on the Knife, and to say otherwise is to make a false statement that is easily demonstrated to be untrue.
There was no Meredith DNA on the knife. NONE.

The Rome lab was only looking at 36(i). The other, on the blade, 36(a) IIRC, had already been established as Mez'.

Clear now?

 

[Vixen]

It's no coincidence that as an aftermath to Marasca Bruno's report, the Renzi government has banned acting politicians from sitting as judges in the Supreme Court. It is obviously a conflict of interest (i.e, being the law maker and also the adjudicator, who ethically, should be objective).
Could you give us a reference for this false allegation?

Nothing will be said, but watch how Marasca and Bruno will shortly be put out to grass at the retired donkey sanctuary to join their chum, Hellmann.
Predicting the future again?????
Is there any reference for this? and please do not point to the nut job rantings on the TJMK guilter site.
Calling the members of the Italian High Court Donkeys is appropriate when describing the motivations of the Chiefi court and the Rudy ISC decision.

It was a reliable source on TJMK. Chieffi clearly is not a "donkey put out to grass" metaphorically as IFAIAA he is still working.

 

[Grinder]

Hard to beat British justice. There is no mafia influence for a start, although there is a strong masonic network in the police.

I believe the three would have been tried at the Old Bailey, the press, as usual, would be barred from publishing anything subjudice. The three would have got Life with a humane leave to apply for parole after six years to be out in nine. They could appeal, but it's not automatic, and it would have to show unusual grounds. 99% of appeals are rejected at first sift.

ah yes the home of the star chamber.

the DNA wouldn't have been accepted what was that case that the judge acquitted the Irish guy?

They wouldn't have been charged. The bulk of the evidence would have been excluded. The witnesses would have been debunked.

 

[Vixen]

On what grounds would Amanda have been arrested on?

In the UK the CPS tend to charge the most serious offence, and maybe one or two others, but they wouldn't bother with a whole string of charges. Like Italy, in such a serious crime, they wouldn't bother with the petty theft of €300- as it just makes the case unwieldy.

 

[bagels]

In the UK the CPS tend to charge the most serious offence, and maybe one or two others, but they wouldn't bother with a whole string of charges. Like Italy, in such a serious crime, they wouldn't bother with the petty theft of €300- as it just makes the case unwieldy.

Let me start from the beginning. It's November 5th. So far the police have DNA belonging to an unknown male. They suspect the break-in was staged. How do they go from this to arresting and charging a female student? Please enlighten me.

 

[Vixen]

Let me start from the beginning. It's November 5th. So far the police have DNA belonging to an unknown male. They suspect the break-in was staged. How do they go from this to arresting and charging a female student? Please enlighten me.

For a start, we are one of the most cctv-ed countries in the world. There would be at least eight to thirty different CCTV shots outside the house at various locations. The forensics squad would have systematically (from my own experience) taken samples from the broken window and surrounds for fingerprints. They'd examine the trajectories of the broken pane, inwards, or outwards, etc.

It's a moot point.

 

[bagels]

For a start, we are one of the most cctv-ed countries in the world. There would be at least eight to thirty different CCTV shots outside the house at various locations. The forensics squad would have systematically (from my own experience) taken samples from the broken window and surrounds for fingerprints. They'd examine the trajectories of the broken pane, inwards, or outwards, etc.

It's a moot point.

So you're saying if evidence that doesn't exist, did exist, the case would be a slam dunk? Well we agree

 

[Vixen]

Oh no, not the lamp! This is only about the 13th time this has come around on the merry-go-round. HOOTS!

Vixen - what was the lamp used for?

Think hard. What does one usually use a lamp for?

 

[Grinder]

For a start, we are one of the most cctv-ed countries in the world. There would be at least eight to thirty different CCTV shots outside the house at various locations. The forensics squad would have systematically (from my own experience) taken samples from the broken window and surrounds for fingerprints. They'd examine the trajectories of the broken pane, inwards, or outwards, etc.

It's a moot point.

The ILE did claim they looked at CCTV and, well, found nothing. This in itself was evidence for innocence but they lost the video.

It is good to hear that you admit they totally bungled the investigation and therefore a not guilty verdict. Just what Marasca said.

 

[Grinder]

Think hard. What does one usually use a lamp for?

If Laura's room was next to Meredith's, would the lamp make her a suspect?

 

[Vixen]

So you're saying if evidence that doesn't exist, did exist, the case would be a slam dunk? Well we agree

In the UK police can hold you for questioning without charge on serious crimes for days, as long as they get a warrant from a magistrate, who never says no.

You can remain silent but it can be held against you (unlike the US Fifth Amendment). We have an adversarial system, so police will endeavour to make a case as strong as possible before sending it to the CPS who decide whether to prosecute.

 

[Vixen]

If Laura's room was next to Meredith's, would the lamp make her a suspect?

It was Amanda's lamp.

 

[Vixen]

The ILE did claim they looked at CCTV and, well, found nothing. This in itself was evidence for innocence but they lost the video.

It is good to hear that you admit they totally bungled the investigation and therefore a not guilty verdict. Just what Marasca said.

I have admitted nothing of the sort. Of course errors were made. The postal police never expected to find a body behind the door, for a start.

 

[bagels]

In the UK police can hold you for questioning without charge on serious crimes for days, as long as they get a warrant from a magistrate, who never says no.

You can remain silent but it can be held against you (unlike the US Fifth Amendment). We have an adversarial system, so police will endeavour to make a case as strong as possible before sending it to the CPS who decide whether to prosecute.

Well something must make them strongly believe a female was responsible for the apparent rape stabbing with male DNA in the victim's genitals. Presumably UK coppers would have been smart enough to know Amanda worked for a local bartender and when he texted her not to come in that night she replied with a customary goodbye "Ok, cya later." That's not really enough to get the ball rolling is it? We still haven't gotten from the male DNA to Amanda the killer. I'm still confused.

 

[Grinder]

It was Amanda's lamp.

If Laura's room was next to Meredith's then it would have been her lamp. Would she then be a suspect? If whoever placed the lamp had taken it from Laura's room would she be a suspect?

There is no evidence at all as to who placed it in Meredith's room. Since Amanda's room was the closest Rudi, the cops, or Steffi would have just grabbed it.

Got it now?

 

[Grinder]

I have admitted nothing of the sort. Of course errors were made. The postal police never expected to find a body behind the door, for a start.

You listed out how the british cops would have produced evidence that the ILE didn't because they bungled the case. You said it just like Marasca.

Where are the videos of Amanda and Raf running all over the place?

 

[Bill Williams]

Oh no, not the lamp! This is only about the 13th time this has come around on the merry-go-round. HOOTS!

Vixen - what was the lamp used for?

Think hard. What does one usually use a lamp for?

Cleaning a room of DNA, such that two of three sets of it are eliminated? Let's rule in/rule out that one first just to be clear.

Otherwise - without any lamp forensics (prints, etc.) who who'd had access to the cottage until, say, 2pm on the 2nd might have needed to grab a lamp for illumination, such that they did not step fully into the room so as not to contaminate it? Obviously Amanda did not bring her forensic presence into the room, so if it was in turn not found on the lamp, what does that suggest?